Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mark Chance" data-source="post: 5071822" data-attributes="member: 2795">I think that maybe this thread needs to be shot and put of its wildly off-topic misery.Either that, or folks could actually discuss PF, especially if it can be done without blathering about why 4E is or is not a better system, or whether or not WotC is evil. For example:I like most of what PF did with the classes. The PF paladin is an improvement over 3.5's. I like the sorcerer bloodlines and the more flavorful/crunchy wizard specialists. Some of it is a bit clunky, however. The bard's versatile performance class feature is a mess. It should either be scrapped or retooled. Great idea; not so great execution. On the DM's side of the screen, the combat maneuver system is a big plus. The implementation of encounter XP budgeting is a nice addition as well. Best of all, I think, are the clear, flexible guidelines for monster CRs and the simple templates, which make it possible to convert just about anything on-the-fly by noting a handful of modifiers. Good stuff there.See? Not hard at all.</blockquote>